Linux is an OS

Linux is an OS, when we say Linux, we mean the entire OS encluding whatever the distribution included by default. We refer to the Linux kernel as just that, or just the kernel.
This group is readable only to members. This is in response to the "Linux is a kernel" group disallowing comments from non-members. Since I can't figure out how to do that here (comment if you know how), I'll just make it unreadable.

Just because some of you internet imbeciles refer to "Linux" as an OS...its not. Send a letter to Linus himself and see what hes got to say on the subject, I'm sure that he will concur. He should, he created the linux kernel. Not only that, if I felt like googling for you all (I may be assuming to much by thinking you can all google for yourselves), I do believe Linus said this himself in an interview somewhere.

irc.sindustries.org -
It damn sure doesn't run on ubuntu!
Oh yeah, and Linux is a kernel, not an OS
Someone shut BING down! It's a real POS. Reply to this

Re: Another thought...

Do you know what difference is the monolithic OS and server-client architectured OS?

Do you know the history of the OS, how it born and for what purposes? How the OS name overruled the name kernel and in what cases?

Do you know why there was big debate many years ago which one is better OS, a monolithic or server-client?

Do you know how the marketing has caused big lie among normal users to believe what is OS, without them actually knowing the computer technology and the history how computers work?

There was/is debate about Linux and GNU/Linux, where GNU propaganda has tried to overrule the computer science. That fight goes in higer level and not on that level where it should. It is more theoretical "what avarage joe believes" by GNU than the complex technical jargon how the 'computer really works.

Now the situation is that people is calling the car as a engine. While only few engineers can really understand that engine is under the hood what just use something to create a mechanical movement making the whole car move. For every else the car is the "engine". The "engine" is what has 3-5 doors, a wheel, pedals, seats, windows, radio, GPS navigator etc.

The only difference is that you can take almost any person and open the hood and show them what is the engine. They can touch it and even see it functionality. If they just have had some kind basic teaching about mechanics in school.

With computers, same thing is not possible with software at all. You can not show them all the software how it works. It is theoretical jargon for them. You can open the computer case door and show them a CPU, 3D card (and GPU on it), power source, motherboard, RAM chips. Even you can give them a keyboard in their hands and they understand that keyboard is not part of the monitor or the mouse, or the case. But the software is almost impossible without many years study.

And even just the understanding what the operating system is, might take many hours, or even years. Even that someone would tell them right away it in simple form, they would not believe it at all. Even it is as simple as "Linux, the kernel, is the operating system". They fight against that because they do not understand the OS functions and development history. They can not see it on the screen, they can not control it with mouse like they can web browser.

They want it to be something mystical and very very complex so people would not understand what it is and how it works. (even the OS's are very complex how they are build, they are very simple and easy to notice, maybe too easy!).

And then there comes questions, why people are so afraid for Linux being the operating system? Why they want to try making it so complex by adding there a ethics of free software and GNU project?

The OS is just like a motherboard in the computer. People does not care so much what motherboard they have, even that it is the one part of computer what allows all other components to be connected together. Without motherboard, users do nothing with their CPU's, GPU's, RAM's, HD's and SSD's. They are just useless metal and plastic what can not be used. But when connecting them to motherboard, you get machine what can work together.

And even the people with basic knowledge of computer hardware, should not mistake CPU to motherboard, or try to call it as CPU/Motherboard. Like it would be Intel/Asus.

Same thing is with the software systems. We have a OS what is under all other softwares. What controls the hardware and supervise resources and share them to all other software. It controls all other software as process and give them executing time for CPU, allocates the memory for them and reads or write the data to/from permanent memory. It is a just a one software but without it we could not run multiple softwares on same time or we could not write applications as easy as today.

The OS is for all other software just like motherboard is for all other components and peripherals. Meaningless alone, as all other all meaningless without it.

There is no marketing or ethics about OS's. It is just about technology how it works and there are even "wars" how it is best to be build so it would work best way.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Linux is not an OS generally, samething like Windows. It is a DOS-Based Operating System....

Re: :-)

Oh c'mon.. You must be joking, right?

Linux (the kernel) is the whole OS.
It is same kind OS as any other OS. OS's does not have GUI's. Those are just other softwares what rans top of the OS. OS does not need to have anykind UI at all. Every UI needs a OS to work. Like command interpreter (like bash) or Fluxbox.

People are believing that the stuff what they see on the screen is the OS. They are under influence of the marketing propaganda. They buy a product called "OS" but they do not know they get OS + lots of other software in one product. The marketing people does not care what the OS is. Only thing what matters for them is that some software on that product is the OS.

They know that you need to buy a OS for your computer so you can run all other software on that computer. It is just making a better product by preinstalling all the software so user gets easier start for using the computer.

I bet you did not know that even the Windows 7 OS is the commandline based, the NT. It is microkernel based OS. While LInux is monolithic. Windows 7 what you see is like what you see, example in the ubuntu. You have Gnome top of all other software and most important of them is the Linux kernel what works as the OS for the whole software stack. Between Linux and Gnome there is lots of different kind softwares what have different functions for every one top of them and they use all resources what software under them offers. The OS is very special because it hides the complexity of the hardware and offers it as virtual machine to all other softwares. It makes developers life easier by giving simple and clear system calls (API's) to use the hardware.

The OS is the software what exist between hardware and all other software. It is located in kernel space or is ran in supervisor mode.
It can be the monolithic kernel (original structure) or it can be server-client (microkernel + servers) what is newer structure.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Your posts get boring after the first paragraph, its annoying. Are you writing a book? Without GNU world applications, The linux kernel would be pretty damned useless. The Linux kernel developers dont maintain the GNU applications wrapped around the kernel do they? No, they dont. Linux is just a kernel.

irc.sindustries.org -
It damn sure doesn't run on ubuntu!
Oh yeah, and Linux is a kernel, not an OS
Someone shut BING down! It's a real POS. Reply to this

Linux is a kernel

Re: Re: Re: :-)

Linux kernel is the operating system. That is the FACT. GNU has _nothing_ to do with Linux operating system. GNU has _own_ operating system called HURD. That is the FACT.

None of GNU software (execluding HURD) works without operating system. Bash, GCC, GLibC etc... All needs an operating system under them to work.

Unless you can proof that Bash, GCC, GlibC etc can manage hardware and all other software without Linux or HURD?

No one does anything just with the operating system. That is just a fundamental software to have any application program working on these days.

You can, of course, write your own application program such way it controls the hardware. But you need to write every hardware control command to it. And every time you switch the hardware, you need to write them again. For getting such application work on other computer than what you are currently using, is a tremulous work that it is easier to re-write the whole application program almost totally again.

And to get multiple application programs to work together, you need to actually code all the applications to understand each other and get them some other way to change execution time. What would be almost impossible because you do not have a operating system doing the hard part for such task.

Linux is a kernel. It is not a microkernel but a monolithic kernel. Monolithic kernel is _the_ operating system. Whole operating system alone in one address space, in one call space. And it was before 2.2 a one binary "blob" until it got more modular monolithic operating system.

GNU people just can not stand that fact but they want to lie and twist the truth so that they would get fame from job what they failed totally.
They even falsified the UNIX standards to support their lies!

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: :-)

Well.. At least I am idiot who is right. And I am very pleased that you called me idiot. Or do you still want to mean to say that Linux is not a monolithic kernel but just a microkernel and so on not a operating system?

Have a nice day and prosper!

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

You are an idiot that doesnt realize that the linux kernel ALONE is useless. It needs all of those fine GNU (GNU NOT UNIX is what GNU stands for by the way) apps it uses. I understand the difference between an operating system, and a distribution of GNU/Linux, apparently you don't. What the hell does it matter what kind of kernel it is? Without the GNU apps, its useless. Read a book or something.

irc.sindustries.org -
It damn sure doesn't run on ubuntu!
Oh yeah, and Linux is a kernel, not an OS
Someone shut BING down! It's a real POS.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: :-)

Quote:

You are an idiot that doesnt realize that the linux kernel ALONE is useless.

And if you would read... You would understand. But you do not read but you just call as idiot as you would be right.

I hope you understand this:Quote:

No one does anything just with the operating system. That is just a fundamental software to have any application program working on these days.

Quote:

It needs all of those fine GNU (GNU NOT UNIX is what GNU stands for by the way) apps it uses. I understand the difference between an operating system, and a distribution of GNU/Linux, apparently you don't.

No you dont. If you would, you would know that Linux kernel is the operating system and GNU/Linux means the development platform (Linux OS + GNU system software and application programs)

Please explain how does Bash, GCC, GLibC etc work without operating system on the computer? Which one manages processes, which one memory usage, which one filesystems, which one networking, which one I/O etc? Then tell what difference is between system calls (operating systems API's) and system call wrapper (what can be any software library, user can write even own system call wrapper and start using it in the fly.)?

Quote:

What the hell does it matter what kind of kernel it is? Without the GNU apps, its useless. Read a book or something.

Okay, you are proofed yourself being such what you called me to be. You do not even know the different arhitectures for operating system. No wonder you call me idiot and you blindly believe GNU's lies and propaganda of GNU/Linux.

Are you saying that one [most] of the world most famous and talented OS professor(s) are wrong? A man who almost invented the server-client architchure for operating systems, at least one if its biggest defenders against monolithic operating systems.
A man who has developed multiple own operating systems, studied and helped to develople maybe dozens. Wrote over hundred scientifical papers of operating systems, wrote few dozens of books what are almost fundemental teaching books for operating system classes in universities.

And basicly you are saying that computer science is lying and GNU project is telling the truth, with their ethics how the software works on the computer hardware?

Do you believe that GNU has not lied and braked the UNIX standards for their own purposes to get a fame what belongs to others?

Without operating system, none of the GNU software (execluding HURD operating system and GRUB operating system bootloader) what you are talking about, would run in the computer hardware. They need an operating system to run. Without operating system you can not even use them at all. Linux is just a monolithic operating system, a monolithic kernel what is the other name for it.
Linux is not a microkernel what is just a most important part of the operating system (others being the servers separated from the microkernel).

So you read the links... but I believe you continue blindly believe GNU's propaganda as I did long time ago. Until you start questioning them, you rip of all the idealogical and ethics and you focus just to the pure technology how the science works.

I believe you even call your home country as England/USA, because USA would not exist or work without the England.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48

I dont think anyone, including me, is going to bother to read that long ass list of ignorant crap you just posted. Try reading a book instead of writing one. It works better when you learn to do the first one before the other.

irc.sindustries.org -
It damn sure doesn't run on ubuntu!
Oh yeah, and Linux is a kernel, not an OS
Someone shut BING down! It's a real POS. Reply to this

Re: You really are an idiot.

It works when you learn to read first before you start calling names and selfishly promoting yourself how you are correct, without pointing anything.

I have shot down all your "points", totally. And you still think you are correct by insulting and not actually READING. Must be so difficult for spend two minutes for it. I wonder do you ever read any books because you are whining when the text is longer than three rows. At least I am sure you have not read any computer science books about operating systems because then you would not say Linux kernel is not a operating system.

Well, you can stay as totally blind GNU fanatic waving the gun. That seems to be least what you can do. Reading is definitely not one of your strongest points. I read all your messages, at least I have more respect for your sayings than you have for mine.

Have a nice day in England/USA.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

lets just say its a "grey area" and everybody
is happy and can go on with using their
computers with the software of their choice ;-)

Re: okey then,

There is no gray areas in science. Only marketing propaganda from GNU has made the Linux position harder ;)

It is very easy to explain the technology, how the shell talks to the operating system or how the Clib needs a operating system. There is no feelings how the stuff works. It is just like physics, we "all" now understand that what the gravitation is and how it affects to stuff. And how to use it to build things.

Same thing is with computer science. We understand what electricity is and how to use it with silicon and how in the end we get computer chips and how to write code in other format than in binary. How to get multiple programs working on the hardware.

Then there comes the "philosophy" (marketing here) from GNU what is saying that because you (as the user) need to use web browser to access the internet it is someway magically GNU/Linux. Browser what needs other software, what needs other software and so on, until we are on the most important software what controls all the other software and hardware... It is just like saying there is ElectricityCompany/MotherboardManufacturer/CPUManufacturer/Linux/GNU/Xorg/Firefox/Internet.
With GNU philosophy it is a England/USA and not USA. Or how about England/Australia. Or Africa/Europe/USA?

In technology what humans build, there is no "gray" area. Operating systems are just plain and simple science, not a magic box what can not be solved how it works. Even that it is such for many when they listen GNU marketing :D

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Re: Re: okey then,

Hehe, yeah I know, is just is there is a
lot of opinions on what part of the operating
system is actually a part of the operating
system it seems....
...hell I could not draw a fine line in
windows where the operating system stops
and the application layer takes over...
...for me this is a grey area ;-)

\\\\\\\"life sucks, get a f***ing helmet alright!\\\\\\\" -Denis LearyReply to this

Re: Re: Re: okey then,

I dont usually like to write long answers but this time I tried to keep it simple as possible. The topic is just not such what can be explained in few words.

Quote:

Hehe, yeah I know, is just is there is a lot of opinions on what part of the operating system is actually a part of the operating system it seems....

Yes, there is lots of opinions. But very few really has knowledge. GNU fans have only opinions. They have a faith and believe what does not apply in computer science. But it can be used very easily without knowing technology.

In short analogy, it is like calling computer as HE/Asus, where first one is your electricity company and later is the computer manufacturer. You can not use your computer without electricity, right? So it is part of the computer. Because in the end that is the most important part in computer how it works. The electricity.

The operating system definition is very simple and clear. <i>The part of the software what runs in the kernel space or in supervisor mode</i>. Thats it. Nothing more complicated than that. It is so simple that most people miss it totally. They want the operating systems being very complex stuff, almost like a todays "Magic". They can not even believe that it is actually very easy to find the operating system because they are all build by the man.

Quote:

...hell I could not draw a fine line in windows where the operating system stops and the application layer takes over...
...for me this is <b>a grey area</b> ;-)

It is actually very easy as well. But one biggest problems what comes for operating systems is that there are different architectures how to build them. And depending them, there are limited options what to include to them. What belongs to the operating system is always case by case. There is not just one single rule what belongs to it. There is just very clear definition but how you meet that definition is up the OS developers what they want actually include to it.

Example, Linux is very easy, as many other Unixes (or Unix clones), as it is a monolithic. It works alone in the kernel space in supervisor mode. Very simple and clear. Same thing goes for SunOS (OS in Solaris and OpenSolaris). Free/Net/OpenBSD's are same and AIX. There are many monolithic OS's.

With microkernels, the thing is more difficult if you have source closed. But the operating system in the Windows is the NT. MS has multiple different operating systems. They have not had just one single one. They are developing multiple different OS's same time. Few are very promising and very very interesting.

MS's operating systems are/were:

MS-DOS (PC-DOS what they bought), it was used as such to time when Windows 95 was released. Before that, Windows was just a desktop environment top of the OS. The OS could be MS-DOS, DR-DOS or other. There was different DE's available, example the GEM.

On Windows 95, the MS-DOS was still the OS, but part of it were replaced by the Windows itself. So part of the Windows became as part of the operating system. That was very huge problem time as everyone can remember how the Windows 95 crashed all the times. The OS was designed for single user and before Windows 95 it did not even have same functions as other OS's. It was very fragile.
The MS-DOS branch was ended in the Windows ME time. ME is the last version of MS-DOS generation and Windows 9x generation (the OS get different in Win95).

Then there are two other OS's what are still both in use. Other is very famous NT. It started as NT 3.0. It had many aspects from Unix, as real multiuser and multitask capabilities. The NT is Server-Client architecture operating system, use a microkernel and modules(servers). Among the time the functions what have included to operating system has changed by time to time when new big release has done (3.x > 4.x > 5.x > 6.x). Example the window manager has sometimes included to operating system and sometimes not. Trident and few other parts of Internet Explorer has belong to NT in some releases. But today the NT is on the version 6.1. It is the OS what is used in Windows 7. It has a microkernel structure (from Microsoft OS developers lessons by Mark Russinovich) and very modular and small memoryprint. Remember the project where Vista should have new "kernel". Well, the project idea was to place the NT to diet and get it small. It takes 40 Mb RAM now. It got removed all un-needed functions. Some of the modules(servers) got moved back to userspace and other changes. But it is the same NT as what was on 90's.

The third OS is the CE. It is distributed free (not open) for embedded systems. But it is as well used as the OS in the Windows Mobile Series 7. The CE is on that version 6.5.

So in the end. MS has two OS currently in markets. NT and CE. Under development there are Singularity (wrote in sing#) and Barrelfish, as two example. There are others as well.

What belongs to the OS in Windows 7 and what not? Very few things belongs to it anymore. But AFIRC, the Window manager was not anymore part of OS. The desktop is not at all part of it. The IE and its parts were removed as well. Explorer is neither part of OS anymore. DRM is part of the OS and many other low level functions. All libraries are removed from the NT operating system.

But it is not so important for avarage user to know exactly what belongs to OS and what not in Windows. Because it is a closed source system, you can not tweak it from "under the hood".

In Linux systems it is totally different thing, you can very easily just update the Linux OS. You can compile it with wanted functions and drivers. You can even in some of it distrobutions replace Linux with Hurd or kFreeBSD (the microkernel version of FreeBSD).

Almost for basic things what user need to first knowledge, is that what you see on the screen, the GRUB, the GDM, Gnome or any other such, are not parts of the operating system. And most important, there is no operating system called GNU/Linux. There is neither a operating system called GNU/Hurd. Because Hurd is part of GNU project and it is like calling GNU/GNU. GNU/Hurd does not exist either because the Hurd is the operating system and Hurd + other GNU software is more than just a operating system.

And when we add marketing to this. We end up to situation where everyone is trying to sell better product than others are offering. There is no stopping for lying or saying something what is not accurate. It is about clients and customers and only those matters, not the technical facts.
And for GNU fans, they are just fans of believe how great GNU is. (GNU project has great software etc. nothing wrong on that) But they want just blindly to believe that GNU did not fail on the most important goal of the project, developing the free operating system.

GNU fanatics can not stand that one Finnish student started own OS as hobby and it turn to be so successful that GNU's developers started to use it. It was PR catastrophic for GNU and especially for RMS. One 20 year old kid came and won everyone with right hand tied behind the back. One 20 year old kid who just graduated from normal university (RMS was in the MIT, he was believed to be a Guru) and he did something what worked right away.

Maybe one of the biggest problems was that Linus never allowed GNU (FSF) to take leadership of the Linux. Other developers known that Linus has the vision of the Linux and all needed personal features what made him great project leader without fanatics about freedom. Linus only cared the technical stuff while RMS is always first after ethics and then long after that about technology. Thats why HURD has never got even good microkernel and it still does not have drivers or any of the functions on servers what are needed to get it run in normal use. Even Minix is much greater state.

GNU/Linux fans can not understand the technology. It seems to be somekind fundamental flaw in their understanding. They can be good code writers, but their believes blinds them totally. They believe that A is B because B needs A.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Re: pipe down.

Quote:

You and your damn speeches. Noones reading that shit, I didn't. It's quite simple..you are wrong.

So all what you can do is stick your fingers to your ears, close your eyes and yell out loud "plaa plaa plaa plaa plaa plaa I am not listening, I am right, I AM RIGHT! PLAA PLAA PLAA YOU ARE IDIOT PLAA PLAA YOU ARE WRONG PLAA PLAA PLAA I AM NOT LISTENING...."

Quote:

Linux is a kernel. Linus Torvalds created a KERNEL, not the GNU apps that run on it. Shut up, idiot

Who told that Linux is not a kernel? LINUX IS A KERNEL! But it is a whole operating system without needs of any GNU software. As you already told that you are wrong, GNU applications runs top of Linux. They are NOT PART of the Linux operating system. Or unless you can proof that GNU softwares are Linux modules...?

ps. When you learn to read... you only find out you are totally wrong and only a blind GNU fanatic who can not stand that someone else did great operating system what has not any parts from GNU project.

pps. Have a nice day in England/USA. Because England/USA is a great country!

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

I'm afraid he's a plain fat troll :)

Re: Re: Re: pipe down.

LOL'd @ the troll part, but yea I thought that too, that maybe he's a troll and he's only taking us on the T.L.E(Troll Line Express), other than that he might just be an ignorant person, let's just hope he reads more and learn.

Re: Re: Re: pipe down.

I think that as well but I give benefit of the doubt.

When 99% times you are heard the operating system working how it works in the Server-Client architecture, it is very difficult to learn that there are other OS architectures (and they are even older ones) what makes the OS work different way.

At some point people start to think "Hey, how kernel can be inside a kernel when the kernel is inside a OS", as for example from GNU what tolds that kernel is inside a kernel just to maintain a change to lie.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Re: Re: pipe down.

>GNU applications run top of Linux. They are NOT PART of the Linux operating system.

To be honest, I think they could be called integral parts of Linux *distributions*, because lots of stuff depend on glibc, libgobject, libgthread and others. Some (bad written) userland applications are not portable to other toolchains than GNU one, so they depend badly on GCC and binutils

Ok now from what I understand(I'm putting this in my own words)
the Linux kernel is the capsule of the regular OS, if you break this down with the most simple logic, it means that the Linux kernel IS the "Virtual"OS.
I'm sorry to say but you're most likely to be the type of people that are alive yet are not capable of understanding, Why am I alive?

I agree with topic

I think proposed idea (Linux is an OS) is quite right. Linux kernel is capable of running application without any GNU tool or library. For GNU folks it's "not an OS" because they rely on glibc and other development tools, but nobody is forced to do this. You can link GNU libs statically and run app on bare kernel - it will work (could be useful in embedded environments). Replace GCC with compiler which doesn't use GNU toolchain (e.g., Sun) - you'll be able to build environment without any GNU crap

+1
more sense for those with no knowledge
I'm new to Linux and have little knowledge about Computer Science, but understanding anything about such subjects is my "Forte".

I'm doing some more research about GNU and such, we can finally bring a final conclusion about "Linux is an OS".

Re: Re: I agree with topic

You could start by checking my signature links.
People talk about Linux as it is a microkernel. They do not know the OS architectures or the computer science history why OS was developed in first place.

For them the OS is just somekind black box or magic what does work and no one knows how it works or what it is.

OS is like a cars engine. We do know every part of the car engines if we just want to know. It is just so that car mechanics and engineers are those who know the parts and how the engine is build. But most drivers does not know almost anything else than the engine is under the hood.

But every driver can notice that wheel, pedals, seats or car radio are not part of the engine. Just by opening the hood and looking it.

Same thing does not work with software. We do not see the software at all. We see what the software draws to us. And with software we can draw amazing things. It is like we do not see how the camera takes the picture when we watch the picture, but we see the picture what was taken by the camera.

GNU fans have falsefied standards to hide the truth. They do not even have a logic to explain GNU's own operating system HURD.

What is Linux and GNU/Linux?
http://tinyurl.com/532kb8
http://tinyurl.com/mum9x
http://tinyurl.com/ngarn8
http://tinyurl.com/qhuhg
http://tinyurl.com/3uaq48Reply to this

Copyright 2006-2015 Maemo-Apps.org Team Legal NoticeAll rights reserved. Maemo-Apps.org has no liability for any content or goods on this site.You can find our FAQ here.All contributors are responsible for the lawfulness of their uploads.Please send us a notice if you spot an ABUSE of the website.Information about advertising in Maemo-Apps.org.Developers can use our public webservice interface. More information here: public apiFor further information or comments on this site, please send us a messageMaemo and the Maemo Logo are copyrighted by the Nokia CorporationContent RSS